Trump loves talking about law and order, right up until international law threatens to hold powerful people accountable. Then suddenly the judges become the problem. Sanctioning the ICC while demanding everyone else respect American rules is quite the spectacle: apparently justice is sacred, provided Washington gets to decide who deserves it.

Exactly. The bubble isn’t AI existing: it’s the assumption that every company needs to spend billions renting GPUs to reinvent autocomplete. The irony is that if open models keep improving, the technology could become more useful precisely as the companies selling it become less valuable. Great for users, catastrophic for anyone who priced their stock as if competition had been abolished. - PS: Before any of the Frontier providers go bust, Apple will simply use its cash reserves to buy a good Siri.

The funniest part is that the dot com crash didn’t kill the internet. It killed a lot of terrible business plans. AI may follow the same script: useful tools survive, investors discover that a chatbot isn’t worth infinite money, and taxpayers get stuck with the data center power bill. The technology can be real while the valuation is pure casino. - PS: You didn’t mention the smartphone. And that’s exactly what people mainly use these days.

Big Tech calls AI data centers an economic boom. The Senate investigation suggests a different business model: privatize the profits, socialize the electricity bills, collect tax breaks, and make everyone sign NDAs. A 100 MW facility may power through the equivalent of 100,000 homes while creating about 100 permanent jobs. That’s not a jobs program: it’s a subsidy program with servers.

Good point. It is important to keep things in perspective.

OpenAI is reportedly running war games for a public uprising after an AI catastrophe. Nothing says »we’re building technology for humanity« quite like rehearsing what to do when humanity shows up furious at your door. Apparently the contingency plan for losing public trust is to prepare for the public, rather than stop giving them reasons to distrust you.

OpenAI promised investors an AI gold rush. Now its projected annual revenue is reportedly $20 billion below earlier expectations. That’s not a rounding error: that’s an entire business empire missing from the spreadsheet. Silicon Valley keeps calling it a revolution, but increasingly it looks like a trillion dollar game of musical chairs, with investors hoping the music never stops.

This!

Big Tech spent years designing platforms that steal our attention, then sold us AI tools to compensate for the time we lost. Now apparently even spending time with your kids is inefficient. The endgame is becoming obvious: humans do the work, AI gets the attention, and Silicon Valley collects the subscription fees. Apparently being a parent is just another productivity bottleneck.

Russia has apparently discovered that ChatGPT can do more than write mediocre LinkedIn posts: it can help industrialize propaganda. The disturbing part isn’t that AI can generate disinformation. It’s that influence campaigns can now manufacture entire conversations at scale, while real people struggle to tell what’s authentic.

Meta has hundreds of billions to chase superintelligence, but apparently can’t figure out how to remove AI videos depicting child abuse, even when journalists hand over the accounts. Facebook’s recommendation algorithm can find this content effortlessly. Shame the moderation team apparently can’t.

Amazon has spent years turning customer surveillance into a business model, and now we discover it apparently keeps detailed records while insulting the very people funding its empire. Nothing says customer obsession quite like treating customers as data mines and punchlines. Bezos built a trillion dollar machine that knows your shopping habits but apparently never learned basic respect.

OpenAI wants parents to trust ChatGPT with teenagers, but apparently not enough to tell them when those teenagers spend an hour discussing suicide, self harm or eating disorders. Calling that »safety« feels generous. It sounds more like OpenAI outsourced the risk to kids and the responsibility to parents.

Meta’s business model has always been surveillance dressed up as connection. Now Muse reportedly wants to build hourly dossiers on people who never even signed up. Friends, family, bystanders: everyone becomes data because one Meta user mentioned them.

Thanks for the hint.

AI companies spent years treating copyright like a Terms of Service box nobody reads. Now a court has suggested that »we copied it to build a competing product« may not magically become fair use because you sprinkle AI on top. Turns out disruption is slightly less fun when the disrupted people have lawyers.

Meta asking users to hand over bank accounts, email archives and passwords while its own engineers reportedly call a massive breach »inevitable« is quite the sales pitch. At this point, Muse isn’t a personal assistant: it’s a beautifully branded single point of failure with Zuckerberg’s logo on it.

AI’s business model is starting to look like a snake eating its own tail: scrape human work, replace the humans who make it, flood the web with synthetic sludge, then wonder why there’s less quality data to train on. Silicon Valley calls it disruption. Everyone else might call it burning the furniture to heat the house.

Amazon wants communities to stop »defying« its AI data centers, which is a fascinating way to describe democracy when democracy becomes inconvenient. Apparently locals should provide the land, water, power and infrastructure, then politely shut up while one of the world’s richest corporations decides what »progress« looks like.

Calling a betting market »journalism« is quite the innovation: why investigate power, verify facts, or protect sources when you can just put odds on reality and call it data? CBS partnering with Kalshi feels less like the future of news and more like turning election night into a casino with correspondents.